1.  Should U of Colorado have launched an investigation?

No they shouldn’t have launched their investigation.  If the professor does not force his opinions on his/her students, then there should not had been no reason for the University to stick their noses in the professor’s life.  On top of that, I think it is perfectly fine to use controversial topics in class for the purpose of getting people to talk about it and voicing their opinions.  This only serves to stimulate and increase the students knowledge and strengthen their beliefs and ideas.

2.  Should a professor, a public intellectual, who knows history and does research be allowed to speak on a subject like this? Is dissent like this protected?

In this case it would be plausible to let Mr. Churchill, speak on a subject like this based on his status in society (a college professor).  The reason for this is because, he is not pulling something out of his proverbial butt and instead has research, years of study and teaching experience to back up his notions and beliefs.  He unlike most, can show correlations between his thesis and events that have happened in the past.  To compare his work to something we see everyday, scientists and psychologists come up with correlations that mightn’t been thought to have been similar yesterday.  In terms of his “dissent” I believe everyone is entitled to their opinion.  Many times, an opinion that isn’t endorsed by the most been shunned or have been the victim of scapegoating for no rightful reason.  Just because the majority doesn’t believe in his opinion doesn’t mean he is wrong.

3.  Would you have fired Ward Churchill?

In The case of Ward Churchill, I would not have fired him, because I believe he has done nothing wrong.  His only crime was showing an opposing view, which often times is not seen in our society.  Nobody ever bothers to look at both sides and too easily begins to slide towards the belief of the majority just to escape being hated or looked down upon.  Also, I believe that Mr. Churchill’s opinion was not forced on his students within his lectures.  His words were simply put into an essay that anyone can read should they choose to and not mandatory for his students to absorb.  With that said, he did nothing wrong that would cause such actions from the University of Colorado to follow with the actions they did.

4.  Should conservative students have their values protected as David Horowitz wants? In essence, should a professor have to teach BOTH sides of an issue? Or should it be their prerogative to teach what they believe is “true” or “most accurate”?

Students, no matter what their political, ethnic, or religious background is, should have the right to know both sides of the story.  It doesn’t matter how much it hurts to come to a realization, because knowing one side has always and will always, lead to arrogance and arrogance in my opinion does more harm.  If we are to raise a society full of people who can think for themselves and be able to decide what they want, they need to understand that there are always two sides to a coin.  Otherwise we will have a civilization of sheep that follow anything someone tells them to do.  Also conservative or not, everybody can always learn something new and it doesn’t hurt to know the other side of the story.  If anything, it can lead to strengthening your position on a given subject.